Paddy Power Negative Rollover question

**RacingJim** · 26 July 2013, 2:00 pm

Hi All,

I'm an affiliate with paddy power, I haven't sent them anything much so far although my site does get a little bit of Paddy Power targetted traffic, but I have a small amount of signups including a few this month.

I read on here and a few other places that paddy power is a 'no negative rollover' programme, but it seems that my account is a negative rollover account, I have accrued negative rollovers for 3 of the last 4 months as the few players I've sent seem to keep winning.

Can anyone shed any light on the negative rollover situation with Paddy Power?

**justbookies** · 26 July 2013, 3:08 pm

They are no negative rollover. You may be seeing negatives each month, but are they actually rolled over negatives or rather just negatives that were created in that particular month?

The terms seem to leave them room to do either, but they are actually no negative rollover in practice:

In the event that a revenue share in any calendar month is a negative amount, Paddy Power shall be entitled but not obliged to carry forward and set off such negative amount against future revenue shares which would otherwise be payable to you. However, Paddy Power shall also be entitled but not obliged to zero the negative balance that would otherwise be carried forward. If a revenue share does not exceed €75, or currency equivalent, Paddy Power shall be entitled to withhold and carry forward such sum until the end of the first calendar month in which the revenue share (including any sum carried forward) exceeds €75, or currency equivalent, at which time payment shall be made in accordance with Clause 5.10 . For the avoidance of doubt, you will only receive a payout when there is a positive balance and it is greater than €75, or currency equivalent, in any given month.

Luke from Paddy Power is helpful and active on this forum, maybe private message him.

**RacingJim** · 26 July 2013, 3:56 pm

Yes my account balance is showing an accrual of all the negatives combined of the last few negative months, so it seems like it's set to negative rollover.

**LukeC** · 29 July 2013, 3:45 am

Hi Jim - I just dropped you a PM. If you can send me some account information I can take a look at this. Thanks.

**RacingJim** · 29 July 2013, 11:43 am

Cheers Luke, all sorted now! Just so people reading this thread are aware, it was because I was using an old account that had lay dormant for quite a long time, Luke has sorted it our for me so no negative rollover at Paddy.

**LukeC** · 29 July 2013, 1:04 pm

No problem! I should clarify for anyone reading, the reason the account was on negative rollover was because it was an old, inactive account where we didn't have the required payment details stored and the affiliate hadn't responded to our requests to update these. As justbookies says, our T&Cs allow for negative rollover but in practice it is not something that we implement.

**universal4** · 30 July 2013, 12:39 pm

If it isn't implimented it shouldn't be in the terms.

Rick
Universal4

**justbookies** · 30 July 2013, 2:07 pm

Originally Posted by Storebuilder

1.2 We may change all or any part of this Agreement at any time.

I have been told by a lawyer that categorically this clause would never stand up in a UK court.

**Storebuilder** · 30 July 2013, 3:01 pm

Can a mod split my post into a new thread as I don't want my rant to get lost and have any detriment with paddypowerluke.

This was just the straw that broke the camels back

Thanks
Tony

**LukeC** · 31 July 2013, 5:32 am

Originally Posted by universal4

If it isn't implimented it shouldn't be in the terms.

Rick
Universal4

As you can see, it is implemented in certain circumstances. It's not a clause that we invoke on any new affiliates or those who are active with us. By active, I refer to those who treat us as a normal business partner, not those who meet a quota or suchlike. I do not think that it is unfair to state that we are a non-negative rollover programme in these circumstances. I think that we have shown that we are quite open about our terms.

What do you think that affiliate programmes should do if:
1) Affiliates over an extended period of time don't give us the ability to pay them the commissions that are owed (don't provide us with bank details and don't respond to our requests for these.)
2) We see that affiliates or people linked to them (prohibited by most programmes T&Cs) are signing up through their own links and betting with us, thereby exploiting the affiliate system.

**-Shay-** · 31 July 2013, 5:40 am

Originally Posted by PaddyPowerLuke

What do you think that affiliate programmes should do if:
1) Affiliates over an extended period of time don't give us the ability to pay them the commissions that are owed (don't provide us with bank details and don't respond to our requests for these.)
2) We see that affiliates or people linked to them (prohibited by most programmes T&Cs) are signing up through their own links and betting with us, thereby exploiting the affiliate system.

1. We did not provide payment details for an Income Access program. After two years, they FINALLY got in contact with us - to be fair, it wasn't that they didn't try to reach out. They did, but we didn't ever open the emails until they put something in the subject line that compelled us to open (we forgot we had business with them). They paid us in full after two years. There were negative months, but those negatives did not carry over, nor did they impact the business from previous or future months.

Thus, my answer to this is do with it what you'd do with everyone else's negative balance.

2. If it is against the terms to use your own affiliate link to sign up/bet, then enforce this separately.

While we're on the topic of Paddy Partner terms - other things to consider changing are the cookie length and fairly compensating affiliate partners for cross channel play.

**LukeC** · 31 July 2013, 6:02 am

Originally Posted by -Shay-

1. We did not provide payment details for an Income Access program. After two years, they FINALLY got in contact with us - to be fair, it wasn't that they didn't try to reach out. They did, but we didn't ever open the emails until they put something in the subject line that compelled us to open (we forgot we had business with them). They paid us in full after two years. There were negative months, but those negatives did not carry over, nor did they impact the business from previous or future months.

Thus, my answer to this is do with it what you'd do with everyone else's negative balance.

2. If it is against the terms to use your own affiliate link to sign up/bet, then enforce this separately.

While we're on the topic of Paddy Partner terms - other things to consider changing are the cookie length and fairly compensating affiliate partners for cross channel play.

In the former case you're entitled to your opinion, but I'd expect our affiliate partners to read the emails that we send to them and act accordingly. I think that enabling affiliate programmes to make timely payments is something that affiliates should do if they want to be treated as a legitimate business partner. If we sent one of our suppliers an invoice two years late I don't think that they would continue working with us - I don't have the legal knowledge as to how long a debt is enforceable for.

I'd even go as far as to say that affiliate programmes would be able to give affiliates better terms if we were able to ensure that certain protocols were followed on the affiliates' side. As it is, we have to deal with a wide range of affiliates who vary both in size and levels of professionalism, so terms have to be flexible to allow for a multitude of different circumstances.

I do not understand what you mean by "do with it what you'd do with everyone else's negative balance." - please could you clarify?

In the latter case it's good to hear that we are placing a more lenient stance on affiliates.

Other terms that you don't like are not relevant to this discussion. We never state otherwise on either of these points and there is no grey area - it is up to affiliates to choose whether they would like to promote us or not given those points.

**Storebuilder** · 31 July 2013, 6:06 am

Let's cut to the chase:

1.6 We reserve the right to change any part of this Agreement at any time.

Everything else is just filler.

**LukeC** · 31 July 2013, 6:09 am

Originally Posted by Storebuilder

Let's cut to the chase:

1.6 We reserve the right to change any part of this Agreement at any time.

Everything else is just filler.

You cannot quote part of a term, because any contractual term is viewed as a whole, not in part. This clause includes "Your continued participation in our affiliate programme after we have posted the changes will constitute binding acceptance of such changes." - affiliates do not have to continue promoting us if a term is changed.

**Storebuilder** · 31 July 2013, 6:22 am

Thanks Luke,

At this point after having poured petrol on the flames I'm going to respectfully bow out of the thread

Experience has taught me that I only lose valuable time by continuing to post.

I'm impressed that you come here to post and support your brand - and I am certainly not knocking paddypower. I'll be looking you up shortly to see how we can do more business together.

It is a frustration borne out of seeing companies like affstars.com just vanish off the face of the earth and leave affiliates with a bad taste in the mouth.

There is a lot that is wrong with the gaming industry but those arguments are for another time and place.

Let's get back to work and make more content

Thanks
Tony

**-Shay-** · 31 July 2013, 6:23 am

Originally Posted by PaddyPowerLuke

I do not understand what you mean by "do with it what you'd do with everyone else's negative balance." - please could you clarify?

In the latter case it's good to hear that we are placing a more lenient stance on affiliates.

Other terms that you don't like are not relevant to this discussion. We never state otherwise on either of these points and there is no grey area - it is up to affiliates to choose whether they would like to promote us or not given those points.

I meant - if you do not carry over negative balances for "active" affiliates - said negative balance should not be carried over for inactive affiliates.

In the case I referenced regarding Income Access (after two years), the affiliate account was used on a slots site we had sold. The headings of the email suggested they were trying to drum up new business. We were not promoting slots at the time so there was really no reason to open it. When they changed the heading to suggest they owed us money (and wanted listed), THAT naturally got our attention. It wasn't a matter of ignoring our "partners". And to be even more fair to the situation, we had been paid by that account before. For some reason, payment details were lost/deleted - which is a gripe I've had and stated in the past with certain programs.

**-Shay-** · 31 July 2013, 6:25 am

Originally Posted by PaddyPowerLuke

You cannot quote part of a term, because any contractual term is viewed as a whole, not in part. This clause includes "Your continued participation in our affiliate programme after we have posted the changes will constitute binding acceptance of such changes." - affiliates do not have to continue promoting us if a term is changed.

And if affiliates quit promoting because they do not agree with the new terms, do they continue to get compensated for the business they've already brought in under old terms?

**LukeC** · 31 July 2013, 7:09 am

Originally Posted by Storebuilder

Thanks Luke,

At this point after having poured petrol on the flames I'm going to respectfully bow out of the thread

Experience has taught me that I only lose valuable time by continuing to post.

I'm impressed that you come here to post and support your brand - and I am certainly not knocking paddypower. I'll be looking you up shortly to see how we can do more business together.

It is a frustration borne out of seeing companies like affstars.com just vanish off the face of the earth and leave affiliates with a bad taste in the mouth.

There is a lot that is wrong with the gaming industry but those arguments are for another time and place.

Let's get back to work and make more content

Thanks
Tony

Thanks Tony, best of luck with your sites. Companies like that make things more difficult for everyone and I fully support affiliates doing due diligence on their potential partners.

**LukeC** · 31 July 2013, 7:46 am

Originally Posted by -Shay-

I meant - if you do not carry over negative balances for "active" affiliates - said negative balance should not be carried over for inactive affiliates.

In the case I referenced regarding Income Access (after two years), the affiliate account was used on a slots site we had sold. The headings of the email suggested they were trying to drum up new business. We were not promoting slots at the time so there was really no reason to open it. When they changed the heading to suggest they owed us money (and wanted listed), THAT naturally got our attention. It wasn't a matter of ignoring our "partners". And to be even more fair to the situation, we had been paid by that account before. For some reason, payment details were lost/deleted - which is a gripe I've had and stated in the past with certain programs.

Do you think that operators should wait indefinitely in these cases where there are balances due to affiliates that cannot be paid? Operators also have a business to run, and having long-term liabilities isn't healthy for any business - be it smaller operators where this could present a cash-flow problem in future, or for larger operators such as ourselves where a cumulatively-not-insignificant liability does not look healthy on a balance sheet and could, theoretically, affect our share price. We want to make payments on time. I don't speak for all operators here as there are some where delays happen all too often - but in our case they're budgeted for and we want to get them to affiliates in line with the most standard financial procedures possible.

When using an intermediary such as Income Access (you said that IA paid, rather than the operator directly), the operator will have already paid them the cost for the month so that is not an issue.

I think we will disagree on the expectation of at least glancing at, let alone addressing those emails, which is fine - but the affiliates where we have bespoke agreements that could be more favourable to them reply to everything and we know that will be the case, be that a request for more coverage or a point of information. My personal opinion is that the way affiliates will get better agreements with operators is by realising that if they make the operators' life easier, they will get the same treatment. I dread to think the cost in man-hours of chasing up affiliates for payment info, or affiliate managers contacting the same affiliates over and over who aren't interested, when a quick "not interested" email would do.

I do think there's a responsibility on the operator's side to provide some reference either to the account or payment information in cases like the one you described above, because I recognize the situation I just described is a little idealistic and might not be practical for all affiliates. "Losing" the information is of course an issue - but in our case as described above, we aren't interested in delaying payments.

Originally Posted by -Shay-

And if affiliates quit promoting because they do not agree with the new terms, do they continue to get compensated for the business they've already brought in under old terms?

I do not know and I wouldn't want to speculate - I'd suggest consulting a lawyer (it was mentioned above about a membership fee, I'd think it might not be a bad idea for some affiliates to group together and have a consultation on various topics such as this so that you have qualified advice).

**universal4** · 31 July 2013, 10:21 am

If you are going to have an "activity" clause in the terms, then the term "active" must be clearly defined. Active affiliate can not mean one thing to one affiliate and something different to a different affiliate. Keeping the "active" status on an affiliate account can not be determined by different standards depending on who the affiliate manager is, it should be clearly defined in the terms.

Then and only then can an affiliate determine whether or not to promote the group based upon those terms.

Personally I fight against and lobby against quota terms of any kind and have been doing so for many years, since I think quotas are bad for ALL affiliates.

Rick
Universal4

Thread: Paddy Power Negative Rollover question

LinkBack

Thread Tools

Search Thread

Display

Paddy Power Negative Rollover question

The Following User Says Thank You to justbookies For This Useful Post:

The Following User Says Thank You to RacingJim For This Useful Post:

The Following User Says Thank You to universal4 For This Useful Post:

The Following User Says Thank You to justbookies For This Useful Post:

The Following User Says Thank You to Storebuilder For This Useful Post:

The Following User Says Thank You to Storebuilder For This Useful Post:

The Following User Says Thank You to LukeC For This Useful Post:

Posting Permissions